The latest lawsuit

[Bairstow]

Did it ever occur to anyone that money is not the only thing this family is after? Recognition and honor are on the line in a grand way here, as whoever designed the World Showcase was certainly a genius and deserves not a small bit of praise.

This reminds me of the case of Osamu Tezuka's widow. He died before the Lion King was produced, and would never recieve the credit he deserved for writing the story, designing all the characters, and essentially producing the entire movie in comic book form three decades before Disney stole it. Long story short, she took Disney to court asking not for money, but recognition of his major part in creating something millions have people enjoyed. I don't remember how the court case ended up panning out, but I do know that at one point the lead animators of Lion King claimed to have never heard of Kimba the White Lion before designing The Lion King, which was ludicrous. If Jaffary did indeed make that alledged presentation to Disney Execs in NYC as their lawyers claim, he should be honored as the designer and creator of the World Showcase, whether or not his family gets a dime for it.

 

[ACE]

Man, you folks really believe Disney can do no wrong. I say if we can bend the copyright rules to allow Disney to keep Mickey, then it shouldn't matter how many years have past. This family should get their day in court. If they can prove the case then they should receive something.

If Disney is so upstanding then explain the deal with Roger Rabbit or Winnie the Pooh?

Don't get me wrong, I love WDW but I don't trust corporate as far as I can throw them.

:wave: ACE

 

[dizpins14]

could afford artists and tried to build the park but can't afford lawyers....hmmmmmmmmm

 

[ACE]

Originally posted by dizpins14
could afford artists and tried to build the park but can't afford lawyers....hmmmmmmmmm

Could afford artist in "1956".

Never tried to build the park. Article states

"One person who was briefed extensively on the project in the 1960s was then-Ohio Congressman Charles Vanik.
The Democratic lawmaker from Cleveland said he strongly urged Mr. Jaffray, a neighbor, to continue to try to raise money to build the then $4 million venture."

Couldn't afford lawyers in the 80's. 24+ years later. Money situation could have changed in 24 yrs.

Defend Disney till the end, huh?

:wave: ACE

 

[juan]

I think both plans are rather elementary and the way the park was built is the only thesable way to build it

If you want to include countries, how do you display them?

In a cluster -- no, it cause some areas to get mor attention than others
Spread out in a circle -- yes, people pass through each one to get to the next, kinda forced to visit

Now you have your circle of countries, what do you put in the center

Grass or landscaping -- no, too much maintenance=loss of $$$
Water -- yes, very low maintenance=gain of $$$

Guests are entering the park, what landmark should they see first

A globe -- the one major similarity in all the countries

viola! EPCOT!!!

 

[no2apprentice]

Several things to remember in this development:

1. Attorneys involved for the plaintiff are experienced at successful litigation against Disney.

2. Don't be misled by the delay in the filing of the suit. The attorneys for the plaintiff are merely getting their ducks in a row. They want to present the strongest case they can early on, hoping for a settlement. A trial would be risky.

3. The case will pivot around two key issues - first of all, if the plaintiff can show evidence that Jaffray met with any Disney officials. Second of all, if the plaintiff's attorneys can show that the design of Epcot is indeed, a direct copy of Jaffray's design.

The first key issue will be hard to prove. Plaintiff's attorneys will need either good hard evidence (something in writing or testimony from someone who worked for Disney), or a large amount of circumstantial evidence that would lead someone to believe the meeting took place, even though Disney denies it.

The second key issue is open to opinion, and makes a trial risky.

Remember, this is a civil matter. The burden of proof will be a "preponderance of evidence." This means whichever side gives the most convincing evidence and arguments, the jury (or judge) is supposed to find for that side.

I think that this case will be very interesting (and for some, disturbing) to see how it unfolds. Without seeing any of the evidence, I can't help but feel Disney is going to settle. I can't see the attorneys taking the case unless they had evidence to support the meeting, and feel strong enough about the similarity of park designs to take the risk at trial.

But hey, it's just my humble opinion.:hammer:

 

[Merlin]

Disney is definitely not above stealing ideas. I had it happen to me about 9 years ago. I presented an idea for a book called "Where in Disneyland is...?" The concept was that you'd see a closeup of something from the park and you would try to guess what it was. Then you would turn the page and you'd see the same thing in context with it's surroundings and then you'd be able to tell what it was. That book (as well as a sequel to it) ended up being published about a year later. They didn't even bother to change the name. The book sold at Disneyland and also in the Disney Stores. I'm not sure if it ever sold at WDW or not. The book is supposedly written by Scott and Shani Wolf. They were both "friends" of mine who worked for Disney. They are the ones I told my idea to.

 

[Katherine]

I don't think that this is going to be a very long case. Is there an official date on the piece of art work? I don't know. I remember hearing about a Mexican family suing DIsney because they couldn't understand what anyone or any of the rides were saying. The also thought that one of the characters would cuss at them. (1) characters aren't allowed to talk unless they don't have a mask, right? (2) with some rides there is a way you can get a translator. They were using a scenerio that they came off laughing after the Haunted Mansion, and that supposedly people were giving thm bad looks. I come off usually smiling at least it's a funny ride! What the family was asking for was for there to be a spanish day at Disney theme parks! I mean if every single language had a day to itself then english would come around only a few times a year! I didn't hear anything else about it though. It would be interesting if anyone could find out how it turned out.

 

[TURKEY]

Originally posted by Merlin
Disney is definitely not above stealing ideas. I had it happen to me about 9 years ago. I presented an idea for a book called "Where in Disneyland is...?" The concept was that you'd see a closeup of something from the park and you would try to guess what it was. Then you would turn the page and you'd see the same thing in context with it's surroundings and then you'd be able to tell what it was. That book (as well as a sequel to it) ended up being published about a year later. They didn't even bother to change the name. The book sold at Disneyland and also in the Disney Stores. I'm not sure if it ever sold at WDW or not. The book is supposedly written by Scott and Shani Wolf. They were both "friends" of mine who worked for Disney. They are the ones I told my idea to.

Like Disney says, any ideas that are not solicited, they become property of the company and you forfeit your ideas.

I'm not sure but the cast newspaper has a feature like this. I think that I read that this feature had been around for more than 9 years.

 

[Tramp]

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. It's not unthinkable that a Disney official presented Jaffray's idea as his/her own to the Epcot designers.

On the other hand, NO MONEY to sue?....if this was a slam dunk, there would've been a million lawyers willing to take this case on 'contingency' just to get a crack at a piece of the hundreds of millions to be won.:lookaroun

 

[Merlin]

Originally posted by turkey leg boy
Like Disney says, any ideas that are not solicited, they become property of the company and you forfeit your ideas.

Sure, but I wasn't trying to "pitch" the idea to Disney. I actually mentioned it to friends over lunch at the Studio in Burbank. I told them it was an idea that I had and that I was considering doing and that I wondered if Disney would back me or publish it.


I'm not sure but the cast newspaper has a feature like this. I think that I read that this feature had been around for more than 9 years. [/QUOTE]

That's certainly a possibility. But is the feature called "Where in Disneyland is...?" If so, and if it truly HAS been around that long then that is a startling coincidence.

 

[ACE]

Originally posted by Tramp
On the other hand, NO MONEY to sue?....if this was a slam dunk, there would've been a million lawyers willing to take this case on 'contingency' just to get a crack at a piece of the hundreds of millions to be won.:lookaroun

I don't remember lawyers being so gung-ho (not a Marine reference) :lol: to sue "Big" corporations back then. The big companies could drag it out and run some lawyers out of business. I also think that the lawyers for this case must have some evidence if they are gonna pursue it. I don't think they would waste their own money if they didn't have something.

Just my opinion.
:wave: ACE

 

[MrPromey]

Originally posted by acellis_99
Man, you folks really believe Disney can do no wrong. I say if we can bend the copyright rules to allow Disney to keep Mickey, then it shouldn't matter how many years have past. This family should get their day in court. If they can prove the case then they should receive something.

If Disney is so upstanding then explain the deal with Roger Rabbit or Winnie the Pooh?

Don't get me wrong, I love WDW but I don't trust corporate as far as I can throw them.

:wave: ACE

Call me crazy but if my father had gone to all this trouble only to see his dream get built by someone else without the least bit of credit and it was something that bothered him all his life, I’d want to do something about it while he was STILL ALIVE!

When this all came to the media shortly after the man’s death, the family said that they wanted to sue for recognition – that they wanted a statue or something in the park honoring him and that they weren’t looking for money - although the lawyer that they had retained made a point to state that a suit asking for a monetary number that would make Disney think twice about stealing anyone else’s ideas was not out of the question. I’m sorry but right or wrong, I can pretty much guarantee that this suit is totally about money.

As for Winnie the Pooh, who exactly should we all feel sorry for? I haven’t heard there being much trouble made from the family of the original author or illustrator. The people suing Disney are people who never put any real creative effort into any of the characters at all. They simply sold stuff with the likeness on it.

Disney is responsible for that family getting the millions of dollars a year that it has already gotten up to this point. Prior to the original deal with Disney, merchandising was on a downward spiral for this group of characters and if you look at the ongoing case, it is clear that everything comes down to an interpretation of the contract that was signed and in this respect, I think Disney has the upper hand. I say this because I have done work for hire and been made to sign contracts more than once that said the company that was paying for my work was given unconditional exclusive rights to my work in any form of print, video, online use and for use with any future technology yet to be invented – I kid you not.

Perhaps this family was gullible or naive for not properly protecting their interests before putting pen to paper but that is entirely their fault. It isn’t like they didn’t have their own lawyers present when that agreement was signed. The articles all lead us to believe that they are a sympathetic lot because they are doing battle with the big evil company but the truth is that they have and will live their lives much more comfortably than most of us without having had to do much of anything in their own lifetimes.

The case with Epcot is different, obviously this family is not in the same financial position and cannot be expected to have been as legally savvy… then again, one would think they would have been suspicious when Disney released the concept art for Epcot to the media prior to park opening. Heck, I remember a picture of them breaking ground and having a flat sign depicting Spaceship Earth at the time…

If there was something to pursue, it should have been pursued when the person claiming credit was still alive if for no other reason than to give them someone who they could put on the stand who was actually claiming credit. Clearly, for whatever reason, these were not his wishes or else more would have been done about it when he was the only person who could have done something about it. If you can get a lawyer who will “fight for you” and who only gets paid “when you win” for a car accident, it isn’t that hard to find one who would do the same for a chance at a piece of this pie.

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,155563,00.html

Heck, what happens if the family of the original artist of this is found? Will they sue Disney over stealing the idea or will Mickey Mouse be found in our court system to have been in the public domain for the last half dozen centuries?

 

[MrPromey]

Originally posted by Merlin
Disney is definitely not above stealing ideas. I had it happen to me about 9 years ago. I presented an idea for a book called "Where in Disneyland is...?" The concept was that you'd see a closeup of something from the park and you would try to guess what it was. Then you would turn the page and you'd see the same thing in context with it's surroundings and then you'd be able to tell what it was. That book (as well as a sequel to it) ended up being published about a year later. They didn't even bother to change the name. The book sold at Disneyland and also in the Disney Stores. I'm not sure if it ever sold at WDW or not. The book is supposedly written by Scott and Shani Wolf. They were both "friends" of mine who worked for Disney. They are the ones I told my idea to.

Well, do you still consider these guys to be your friends? It sounds to me like they were responsible for stealing your idea.

Also, are you absolutely sure that they made these books under the employment of Disney? If so than as acting employees of Disney, their stealing of your idea would become Disney’s responsibility even if the company did not formally set out to steal your idea. I ask this because credit for such types of work is usually not plainly disclosed when it is done under another’s employment. I have a few books from WDW that don’t even give credit of any kind anywhere in the book to the photographers or copywriters. In fact, I have one sitting right her on my desk titled “Walt Disney World, the First Decade” which incidentally, has concept art for a second park in the back of it.

 

[Bairstow]

Does anyone have one of those big Disney World coffee table books with EPCOT conceptual art? I know Since the World Began has some. I would be interested to know the earliest date the World Showcase began to take it's present form.

It's a shame that we'll probably never know the truth about this issue. If Disney did have any records proving that Jaffary visited their New York Office they were probably shredded Saturday morning. After all the plaigarism disney has performed over the years it would be nice to see them finally get what they deserve and fork out a multi-billion dollar settlement. Maybe then they'd think twice about suing day care centers over their murals.

 

[Merlin]

Originally posted by MrPromey
Well, do you still consider these guys to be your friends? It sounds to me like they were responsible for stealing your idea.

Also, are you absolutely sure that they made these books under the employment of Disney? If so than as acting employees of Disney, their stealing of your idea would become Disney’s responsibility even if the company did not formally set out to steal your idea. I ask this because credit for such types of work is usually not plainly disclosed when it is done under another’s employment. I have a few books from WDW that don’t even give credit of any kind anywhere in the book to the photographers or copywriters. In fact, I have one sitting right her on my desk titled “Walt Disney World, the First Decade” which incidentally, has concept art for a second park in the back of it.

Well first of all, I mistakenly listed the title as "Where in Disneyland is..?" and it was actually called "Where in Disneyland Park?". The sequel was called "Where in Disneyland Attractions". They were published by Page Publishing. The second one had a forward by Paul Pressler. The first had a forward by the guy who was president of Disneyland at the time (Jack something...I can't remember).

Also, I think you actually have it backwards regarding the crediting of authors, photographers, etc on Disney books. I have a huge collection of Disney books and nearly all of them have the authors' names on the covers.

 

[thedisneyfan]

This case is ridiculous! If someone stole my copyrighted idea I would immediately file a lawsuit! Trust me, he would not have had any trouble finding a fantastic lawyer who would work on a contingency even in the early eighties if his case had any merit. This guy obviously didn't have a case then and obviously doesn't have a case now. The only reason that they waited is so they could snap some photos of some old dying guy next to conceptual art(which by the way looks to be an extremely poor attempt at calling it Epcot) and then wait until he dies so they can go into court saying: "this poor dead guy lived his poor entire sad life knowing that Disney stole HIS idea with Disney's Epcot and now he's dead...... boo hoo boo hoo......sob sob sob." Give me a break! They only waited until he was dead to bring suit to hope that the sympathy affect would carry their pathetic case to victory. :fork: If his family should win, then I think that the World's Fair folks should sue him for taking their concept! :lol:

As to those people who apparently think that Disney can do nothing right, then why are you on a Disney fan site in the first place? You don't have to always agree with what Disney does and you can disagree, but by your words here you think Disney is an absolute horror of a company and does nothing but evil.


As to the obvious showing that Disney is bad with Wide World of Sports...I don't think that the case is over yet and don't be surprised when it gets over turned on appeal!

Disney will not and should not settle this case because they have to put a stop to this crap!

 

[thedisneyfan]

Now that I thought about it some more I guess the DaVinci ancestors should sue Boeing and Airbus and the Wright Bros for stealing the concept of a flying machine, European nations should also sue Disney for obviously stealing the idea of a castle, the Romans(Italians) should sue the US for building the largest highway system that connected all of our lands because they were the first to do it and we obviously stole this too!!!

 

[Bairstow]

Originally posted by thedisneyfan
Now that I thought about it some more I guess the DaVinci ancestors should sue Boeing and Airbus and the Wright Bros for stealing the concept of a flying machine, European nations should also sue Disney for obviously stealing the idea of a castle, the Romans(Italians) should sue the US for building the largest highway system that connected all of our lands because they were the first to do it and we obviously stole this too!!!

Yes, but at least in the instances you pointed out those who adopt the ideas of other people acknowledge their influences. Using the ideas and knowledge of those before and around you is one thing, but this is plagarism and copyright infringement we're talking about here. Considering how dilligently (and visciously) Disney defends their intellectual property it is always thrilling to see someone willing to point out their hypocrisy.

 

[thedisneyfan]

It still has to be proven. Judging by the pictures and the suspicious circumstances around the plaintiff's case here I just don't see it!